Oregon Daily Emerald
Opinions expressed on the editorial page are those of the Emerald and
do not necessarily represent the opinions of the ASUO or the Unt/eratty.
However, the Emerald does present on this page columnists and letter
writers whose opinions reflect those of our diverse readership and not those
of the Emerald Itself.
PHIL SEMAS, Editor
WILBUR BISHOP JR. Business and Advertising Manager
ANNETTE BUCHANAN
Managing Editor
MIKE FANCHER
News Editor
CLIFF SANDERLIN
Editorial Page Editor
NOMI BORENSTEIN
Associate Editor
University of Oregon, Eugene, Thursday, March 9, 1967
‘Drug Problem’
Is Only Part
From all over the Pacific Northwest college administrators
flocked to Portland last weekend.
The administrators, mostly deans of men and women and
heads of counseling services, wanted to find out all they
could about drug use. Most of them were more than curious.
They were anxious. They sat for hours at panel sessions and
speeches and zealously asked questions afterwards. Students
on their campuses have been using drugs and they, as admin
istrators, admittedly don’t know enough about drug use to
cope with the situation.
In short, they were aware of the allegation that college
administrators are the last people on campus to find out
what’s going on, and they wanted to do something about it.
While at the conference, they were presented a well
balanced program of speakers and panels delving into the
social, legal, and medical aspects of drug use. The moral
decisions—the value judgments—were left for them to
decide for themselves on the basis of the facts.
Hopefully, now that it is over, the administrators will
follow the pattern, set at the Portland conference, on their
own campuses. Hopefully they will approach the ‘ drug
problem” from an educational angle, as the University's
Office of Student Affairs has been doing this year.
They would be wise to follow the recommendation of the
University’s dean of men, Robert Bowlin, who cautioned
against “indoctrination” and suggested, instead, providing
students with a balanced program of speakers, “so they will
have as many facts as possible for when they are put into a
position of making a decision.”
We especially hope they heed the warning of Arthur
Pearl, professor of education at the University. The articu
late “fighter” told the administrators that drug abuse is a
symptom of a much more serious problem—a problem
brought about by a lack of educational options at the Uni
versity level, and by the impersonal pressure-cooker atmos
phere caused by universities’ acquiescence to outside pres
sures for specialized, credential-carrying automatons.
In all, we feel the administrators were sincere in their
desire to learn about drug use.
But we hope they keep in mind that just knowing about
drugs is not going to solve the problem. They have the
immediate problem of educating their students about drugs.
But more important they have the long-range duty of chang
ing the conditions at their colleges so students won’t find it
“necessary” to use LSD to “expand their minds.” They need
to work with faculty and students to provide an educational
experience adequate to satisfy and stimulate students who
will otherwise seek creative motivation through repeated
use of drugs.
No doubt about it, the administrators have a job on their
hands. We hope they can handle it .
Still a Chance
For the Greeks
Members of fraternities and sororities at the University
generally look on the Emerald as a harsh critic of their
system. And we do often criticize them, for there is much to
criticize.
But there is also much to praise, especially in this year’s
leadership. Last week’s Greek Focus Week is a good exam
ple. It included solid discussions of three of the major issues
of the day—discrimination, pollution, and the student voice
in higher education. There was also a panel which criticized
fraternities, something unusual in a Greek-run program.
The fraternity system has a long way to go on this campus.
It faces many problems, particularly discrimination and its
relation to the Conduct Code. But with leadership like that
of IFC President Warren Houston, it has a chance to solve
those problems and play a meaningful role in the University
community.
Emerald Editor:
All letters to the editor must
be typewritten and double
spaced. Letters must not ex
ceed 300 words and must be
signed in ink, giving the class
and major of the writer. Those
dealing with one subject and
pertaining to the University or
Eugene community will be giv
en preference. The Emerald re
serves the right to edit letters
for style, grammar, punctuation,
and potentially libelous content.
Letters not meeting those cri
teria and those which are mim
eographed or otherwise obvious
duplicates will be returned.
Editor’s Note: Most of the let
ters received this week, due to
space limitations, will appear
at the first of next term.
Aberle Disclaimer
Emerald Editor:
The Emerald’s account of my
talk at the Free Speech Plat
form on March 1 (Emerald,
March 2, page 8, columns 1 and
2) is substantially incorrect. 1
accept no responsibility for any
portion of the Emerald’s ver
sion of what I said. Every sec
tion is seriously inaccurate, and
one paragraph is unintelligible
to me. I shall be glad to sup
ply the Emerald with a full
copy of the text from which 1
spoke.
David F. Aberle
Professor of Anthro
pology
Editor’s Note: Mr. Aberle has
given the Emerald the full text
of his speech, which will be
used early next term to cor
rect the errors in the story.
* • •
Gregory’s Message
Emerald Editor:
Mr. Gregory’s indictment of
man's inhumanity to man as
manifested by the white com
munity’s treatment of the hlack
was humorous, forceful, and
sincere.
But the signmcance of the
presentation, for me, was not
contained in Mr. Gregory’s
speech, but in our response to
it.
We rewarded his presentation
with a standing ovation—an ap
propriate reaction for people
who feel emotionally touched
and stimulated, but hardly ap
propriate for people who are
deeply shocked by an exposure
of their own character; an ap
propriate response for people
who have experienced psycholo
gical gratification and excite
ment from an opportunity to ex
alt right and condemn wrong,
but hardly appropriate for peo
ple who really, in their guts as
well as their minds, identify
themselves with the evil they
so enthusiastically condemn.
The latter, of course, was the
message Mr. Gregory was try
ing to get across. It is our re
sponsibility. We cannot, as he
said, “pass the buck.” Either we
failed to understand what he
was trying to say or we ably
demonstrated the unique and
amazing capacity of the human
mind to tolerate contradiction
by having the gall to enthusias
tically applaud, indeed, give a
standing ovation in response to
a devastating indictment of the
very same despicable behavior
we will, most assuredly, prac
tice tomorrow.
With respect to Mr. Gregory’s
presentation, I think it repre
sents another in a long series of
admirable but futile attempts
to stimulate meaningful aware
ness of injustice by appealing to
conscience through a mere state
ment of the problem. To say
something in an attempt to stim
ulate awareness, let alone ac
Oregon Daily Emerald
Ron Eachus, Sports Editor
Maxine Elliott, Feature Editor
Tom Thompson, Photo Editor
Paul Polsky, Associate Sports Editor
Chris Hoglum, Entertainment Editor
Lee O’Conner,
Women’s Affairs Editor
Jaqi Thompson,
Political Affairs Editor
Editorial Board: Phil Semas, Cliff San
derlin, Annette Buchanan, Nomi,
Borenstein, Bob Holmes, Robin
Tuttle, Gary Barnes, Chuck Pruitt,
Tom Nash, Dave McCloskey, Roger
Leo, Spencer Block, Jean Snider,
Mike Fancher, Sandra Watts, Rob
ert Carl, Krin De Jonge
tion, regarding man's inhuman
ity to man as embodied in the
complex, controversial, and
emotionally charged civil rights
issue—and have the white pow
er structure respond in unani
mous agreement and suppoti is
to come dangerously close to
saying nothing of significance
regarding the real issue, which,
of course, is not that there is
injustice in the world, but how
to deal with it.
Why is it that as long as the
problem of man's inhumanity
to man is dealt with on a high
plane generalization, involving
only the condemnation of real
ity and ottering to strategy for
implementing change, we give
unwavering and undivided sup
port, while at the same time our
response to virtually every ac
tive attempt to change that real
ity is, at best, passive?
Dan Dodd
Graduate, Remedial
Education
• * *
Two Cultures
Emerald Editor:
Due to the large number of
scientist.s 1 have know who have
taken an active interest in the
fine arts and humanities, I have
always presumed that the "two
cultures” were more artifact
than real. Certain events and
conversations in the last weeks
have led me to drastically alter
these opinions.
The first event was the ap
pearance on our campus of Ja
cob Bronowski, whose lectures
were not well received by some
members of our scientific com
munity. Professional scientists,
and even eminent ones, accused
Bronowski of bring a "fake,"
or expressed their "resentment”
of his oversimplifications. They
evidently tried to listen to a
philosopher of science in the
same manner that they would
critically hear a professional
seminar speaker in their own
fields. The result was that there
was, in many cases, no commu
nication. 1 submit that such
scientists are so "over-profes
sional” that they have become
incapable of communicating on
certain other meaningful levels.
Secondly, discussion with sev
eral Honors College students,
the presumed intellectual elite
of our University, has shown
an almost manic resentment of
the requirement that they do
nate 12 or 15 of their 186 term
hours to becoming exposed to
topics in contemporary science:
topics which, like it or not, are
in large part responsible for
shaping their individual worlds.
Both groups of people men
tioned above arc the results of
the failure to attain our pro
fessed educational objectives:
the opening of new channels of
thought in an attempt to under
stand and to some degree syn
thesize all aspects of human
thought and endeavor. Instead,
our education seems 10 consist
of the progressive closing of
doors, either to maintain a nigh
Gl’A, or to gain status in a pro
fessional discipline.
Is it any wonder that a pro
fessional scientist has difficulty
communicating with an ada
mantly arts oriented student in
the classroom?
Janies C. Hickman
Graduate, Itiology
♦ * •
No Sense
Emerald Editor:
I have read and reread Mr.
Desmond Jolly's Emerald article
of February 27, and I must con
fess that most of it makes no
sense at all to me. I understand
all of the words used by Jolly,
but I do not understand most
of the statements composed by
him. They are ambiguous.
If Jolly had been required to
validate his observations and to
specify exactly and exemplarics
carried by his statements. I am
sure that his article would have
been written differently. 1 doubt
that Jolly has definitive grounds
for most of the statements made
in his article
J. A. Nylander
(•raduate, Educational
Psychology
« « •
Stop Now
Emerald Editor:
Barbara Doming, one of four
American women who recently
went to North Viet Nam, spoke
here on campus the other day,
and I made myself go and hear
her. I know it woidd lx* dread
ful (it was) and that 1 would
have to listen to what I do
not want to hear: it makes me
feel very guilty to live at ease
and in security, while, in my
name as an American, a small
country is being brutally de
stroyed.
That is what it amounts to:
the brutal destruction of a small
country and the terrorizing of
its people by a foreign invader
(yes, that’s us; we arc the only
foreigners in Viet Nam).
During her talk Miss Dom
ing answered some questions
which she has, no doubt, fre
quently been asked:
"Are we not using restraint?”
Well, yes, she says. We have the
power literally to destroy every
body in the world, and we hav
en't done it, so we arc using
restraint, in a way.
"Are we aiming at military
targets and only killing and
maiming women, children, the
old and the helpless, by acci
dent?” She had a lot to say
about that, including the fact
that some of the weapons we are
using, such as napalm and the
so-called “lazy dog" bomb are
not effective against steel and
concrete but devastating for
humans ("anti-personnel bombs"
the military is pleased to call
them). Napalm melts the limbs
(Continued on paje 11)
"Tall oak.s fROM
LHTLt Acorns &Pow*a^’^rt)